%% Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
pe> But I'd like to see this taken further: make "info" a subdirectory
pe> of "doc", make "man" a subdirectory of "doc", make "dvi" a
pe> subdirectory of "doc", make "html" a subdirectory of "doc", in
pe> short put all the documentation into "doc".
No, thanks. Absolutely not for man and definitely not for info. HTML
seems unimportant; I've never noticed any system with "/usr/html" right
now so I don't care where it goes.
There's 20+ years of history behind ${prefix}/man and there's, oh, say,
13+ years of history behind ${prefix}/info. Moving man to .../share
(${datadir}) on some systems was painful enough, and there was a very
solid technical reason to do that. And they all still provide symlinks
from /usr/man.
pe> The last thing I want is each documentation format claiming its
pe> own major directory in the file system.
Um... why not?
If you have a good reason for this change, that's one thing. Things
like "it's messy" or "I don't like it" aren't good reasons... anyway,
not good enough to have the GNU standards fly in the face of the
expectations and experience built up over all those years of history.
My $0.02.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Network Management Development
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.
